Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-06-04-Speech-3-257"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080604.26.3-257"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I should firstly like to congratulate the Commission on the initiative of this proposal, and this for two reasons. Firstly, because it is in keeping with and follows on from the European Union’s initiative and proactive stance on this matter in the UN General Assembly and, secondly, because it is based on a very important principle, which is assessing the impact of fisheries even before authorisation is given to carry out this activity.
This is because we are talking about areas where there is currently no regional fisheries organisation. The truth of the matter is that in coastal areas it is the responsibility of the states to adopt measures to protect vulnerable ecosystems from bottom fishing. In international waters, the protection of the marine environment is generally laid down by regional marine conventions, where these exist, while the adoption of measures for the protection and management of marine living resources and the regulation of the impact of fishing on vulnerable ecosystems comes under the responsibility of Regional Fisheries Management Organisations. However, there are high-sea areas that are not covered by any fisheries organisation, which is tantamount to an encouragement to engage in destructive fishery activities.
It was with this reality in mind that the UN General Assembly, as you would expect, with the EU playing a leading role, made progress towards a notion of the need to do something to protect the seabed, where there is currently no control whatsoever.
This is indeed positive action, which we should highlight and welcome, as we should the Commission’s own proposal, yet this is also a proposal that we can call
as we shall force ships flying the flag of our Member States to respect a set of rules that we will have to ensure, via diplomatic channels, that other third countries fishing in these areas we are talking about – the deep seabed – also follow suit. Otherwise there is little point in the European Union having to lead the way and oblige its ships to conduct these studies and fulfil a set of requirements if other ships under other flags then engage in destructive fishing practices in the very area that we wish to protect.
There is, therefore, one area in this
proposal for which we have to congratulate the Commission, that must have a consequence as regards diplomatic efforts, based also on the agreement reached with the UN General Assembly, so that we can really take a step forward in this matter.
As regards some of this issues mentioned here – the 1 000 metre issue – Commissioner, in the Committee on Fisheries we were able to hold a hearing with specialists, and I was able to listen to a number of specialists, and their consensus of opinion is that the 1 000 metres, or 800, or 500, or 1 200, are not a technical measure but merely a policy choice. Yet, if with this proposal we are already forcing those who wish to fish in a certain area to study the seabeds beforehand and the risk in these seabeds, it is my belief that this study will encompass all depths from 800 to 1 100, or to 1 500, and, therefore, there would be no need to set a clear definition of 1 000 metres, as this is already protected in another way.
However, we are still waiting for some further justification, possibly of a technical nature, that the specialists we heard were not able to pin point, but I think that what the Commissioner has said up to now does not present sufficient grounds for us to suppose that the 1 000 metre proposal would be valid. Nevertheless, we shall keep on waiting and we do in fact hope that the European Parliament’s proposal may be taken into consideration following tomorrow’s vote."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"generous"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples